Bianchi et al., 2018
Bianchi, F., Garnett, E., Dorsel, C., Aveyard, P., & Jebb, S.A. (2018). Restructuring physical micro-environments to reduce the demand for meat: a systematic review and qualitative comparative analysis. The Lancet: Planetary Health, 2(9). 384-397.
The authors of this study carried out a systematic review of research reporting the effects of different types of interventions in the microenvironments − places where people buy or consume food − on meat demand. Some examples of changes to the microenvironment that can have an influence on meat demand were reducing portion sizes of meat, providing or promoting meat alternatives, repositioning meat products to make them less prominent, and altering prices.
In their final analysis, the authors included 14 papers reporting the results of 18 studies and the effects of 22 different interventions, for a grand total of 11,290 observations on individuals. The results of the review were analyzed to determine which interventions were most effective in changing consumer behavior.
The findings show that some interventions have more potential than others for reducing meat demand and consumption. Here are some examples of successful interventions taken from the study:
- People presented with smaller meat portion sizes over a period of time, both in real-life contexts and in a laboratory context, decreased their meat consumption.
- Vonderschmidt et al., 2023 shows that smaller portions are a key driver of natural reduction in meat consumption over time.
- Consumers offered meat-free or reduced-meat alternatives as well as individual coaching, cooking lessons or education over several weeks reduced their meat consumption, and the effect tended to persist over time.
- Consumers increased their preference for plant-based alternatives if meat products were made less appealing compared to meat-free products (for instance by adding a picture of an animal’s head next to the picture of a specific dish).
- Students increased their demand for vegetarian meals if these were presented more prominently than meat options in online menus and in canteens. Changing the verbal description of meat-based meals on a menu, for instance by using the wording “meat” instead of “standard” or “normal” increased demand for vegetarian meal options.
-
In contrast, consumers were less inclined to buy less meat based on considerations of price.
-
Similarly, adding information on labels about sustainability had no detectable effect on purchasing habits.
-
Three interventions reducing the portion size of meat servings reduced meat consumption in randomised trials.
-
Three interventions providing meat alternatives with supporting educational material were associated with reduced meat demand in pre-post design studies.
-
Three of four interventions altering the sensory properties (eg, visual presentation) of meat or meat alternatives at point of purchase reduced meat demand in randomised trials.
-
Four interventions repositioning meat products to be less prominent at point of purchase were associated with lower meat demand, but only two such interventions reached statistical significance in a randomised trial and a multiple treatment reversal design.
-
Only one of five interventions manipulating the description of meat or meat alternatives at point of purchase was associated with lower meat demand in a multiple treatment reversal design.
-
Evidence from randomised trials evaluating a pricing intervention or interventions restructuring several aspects of micro-environments was too scarce or inconsistent to be conclusive.